Arctic Sea Ice has grown to levels that exceed 2006, 2007 and 2008 for this day each year. A tick or so and 2009 will enter the "Standard Deviation Average" for the 30 year period on which the averages are based.

Watch the speeches in Copenhagen. I'm pretty sure that the over dressed, over bearing, limosine riding, leftist scandinavians in attendance will all hop onto their private jets and fly home after the announcements on this topic.

Blizzards in late Fall, growing Arctic Ice, hunters lost in deep snow in the American west.

Arctic Sea Ice has grown to levels that exceed 2006, 2007 and 2008 for this day each year. A tick or so and 2009 will enter the "Standard Deviation Average" for the 30 year period on which the averages are based.

Watch the speeches in Copenhagen. I'm pretty sure that the over dressed, over bearing, limosine riding, leftist scandinavians in attendance will all hop onto their private jets and fly home after the announcements on this topic.

Blizzards in late Fall, growing Arctic Ice, hunters lost in deep snow in the American west.

Yes, the data show that Arctic sea ice really is in a state of ongoing decline. The reason we know this is because satellites offer us a long-term record. As of September 2007, the September rate of sea ice decline since 1979 was approximately -10 percent per decade, or 72,000 square kilometers (28,000 square miles) per year. Although the 2009 sea ice minimum was larger than the past two years, the rate of decline since 1979 increased to -11.2 percent per decade. September is the month that Arctic sea ice melts back to its lowest point, known as the annual minimum, and is an important indicator of overall ice conditions. However, sea ice in the Arctic is in decline in all months and the decline is greater and the rate faster than natural causes could account for. For more on the basics of sea ice, read Quick Facts on Arctic Sea Ice.

Is Arctic sea ice starting to recover?

In 2008, Arctic sea ice reached a minimum extent that was about 10 percent greater than the record low of 2007, and the minimum extent in 2009 was greater than either 2007 or 2008. Does this mean that Arctic sea ice is beginning to recover?

Even though the extent of Arctic sea ice has not returned to the record low of 2007, the data show that it is not recovering. To recover would mean returning to within its previous, long-term range. Arctic sea ice in September 2008 remained 34 percent below the average extent from 1979 to 2000, and in September 2009, it was 24 percent below the long term average. In addition, sea ice remains much thinner than in the past, and so is more vulnerable to further decline. The data suggest that the ice reached a record low volume in 2008, and has thinned even more in 2009. Sea ice extent normally varies from year to year, much like the weather changes from day to day. But just as one warm day in October does not negate a cooling trend toward winter, a slight annual gain in sea ice extent over a record low does not negate the long-term decline.

In addition, ice extent is only one measure of sea ice. Satellite measurements from NASA show that in 2008, Arctic sea ice was thinner than 2007, and likely reached a record low volume. So, what would scientists call a recovery in sea ice? First, a true recovery would continue over a longer time period than two years. Second, scientists would expect to see a series of minimum sea ice extents that not only exceed the previous year, but also return to within the range of natural variation. In a recovery, scientists would also expect to see a return to an Arctic sea ice cover dominated by thicker, multiyear ice.

Old v. new ice in Arctic, February 2009: These maps show the median age of February sea ice from 1981-2009 (left) and February 2009 (right). As of February 2009, ice older than two years accounted for less than 10 percent of the ice cover. Data provided by J. Maslanik, C. Fowler, University of Colorado, Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research.

Arctic Sea Ice has grown to levels that exceed 2006, 2007 and 2008 for this day each year. A tick or so and 2009 will enter the "Standard Deviation Average" for the 30 year period on which the averages are based.

Watch the speeches in Copenhagen. I'm pretty sure that the over dressed, over bearing, limosine riding, leftist scandinavians in attendance will all hop onto their private jets and fly home after the announcements on this topic.

Blizzards in late Fall, growing Arctic Ice, hunters lost in deep snow in the American west.

In 2008, Arctic sea ice reached a minimum extent that was about 10 percent greater than the record low of 2007, and the minimum extent in 2009 was greater than either 2007 or 2008. Does this mean that Arctic sea ice is beginning to recover?

Even though the extent of Arctic sea ice has not returned to the record low of 2007, the data show that it is not recovering. To recover would mean returning to within its previous, long-term range. Arctic sea ice in September 2008 remained 34 percent below the average extent from 1979 to 2000, and in September 2009, it was 24 percent below the long term average. In addition, sea ice remains much thinner than in the past, and so is more vulnerable to further decline. The data suggest that the ice reached a record low volume in 2008, and has thinned even more in 2009. Sea ice extent normally varies from year to year, much like the weather changes from day to day. But just as one warm day in October does not negate a cooling trend toward winter, a slight annual gain in sea ice extent over a record low does not negate the long-term decline.

<snip>

Old v. new ice in Arctic, February 2009: These maps show the median age of February sea ice from 1981-2009 (left) and February 2009 (right). As of February 2009, ice older than two years accounted for less than 10 percent of the ice cover. Data provided by J. Maslanik, C. Fowler, University of Colorado, Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research.

Click to expand...

So the low was recent and an increase has followed that. When it reaches its low and then increases, you'd almost think that it's increasing. However, those that study this say that an increase is a continued decrease.

2009 is 10% or so less reduced than was 2008. Is that a 10% increase or just a 10% reduced decrease? Experts say this is not thick enough to be an increase. It took 30+ years for the thinness to occur and an increase seems to me, to be an increase.

It sounds like a fantasy football geek saying that his real life team is great because it's the best in one category or another while the win-loss columns show a last place. At some point, the real, unvarnished data is the data. Either they win or they lose.

I worked with an accountant once who always returned to the phrase, "The number is the number". What he meant was that any justification or manipulation of data was only smoke and mirrors. At the end of the day, the numbers are the numbers. Wishing they were something that they are not does not change reality.

Arctic Sea Ice has grown to levels that exceed 2006, 2007 and 2008 for this day each year. A tick or so and 2009 will enter the "Standard Deviation Average" for the 30 year period on which the averages are based.

Watch the speeches in Copenhagen. I'm pretty sure that the over dressed, over bearing, limosine riding, leftist scandinavians in attendance will all hop onto their private jets and fly home after the announcements on this topic.

Blizzards in late Fall, growing Arctic Ice, hunters lost in deep snow in the American west.

In 2008, Arctic sea ice reached a minimum extent that was about 10 percent greater than the record low of 2007, and the minimum extent in 2009 was greater than either 2007 or 2008. Does this mean that Arctic sea ice is beginning to recover?

Even though the extent of Arctic sea ice has not returned to the record low of 2007, the data show that it is not recovering. To recover would mean returning to within its previous, long-term range. Arctic sea ice in September 2008 remained 34 percent below the average extent from 1979 to 2000, and in September 2009, it was 24 percent below the long term average. In addition, sea ice remains much thinner than in the past, and so is more vulnerable to further decline. The data suggest that the ice reached a record low volume in 2008, and has thinned even more in 2009. Sea ice extent normally varies from year to year, much like the weather changes from day to day. But just as one warm day in October does not negate a cooling trend toward winter, a slight annual gain in sea ice extent over a record low does not negate the long-term decline.

<snip>

Old v. new ice in Arctic, February 2009: These maps show the median age of February sea ice from 1981-2009 (left) and February 2009 (right). As of February 2009, ice older than two years accounted for less than 10 percent of the ice cover. Data provided by J. Maslanik, C. Fowler, University of Colorado, Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research.

Click to expand...

So the low was recent and an increase has followed that. When it reaches its low and then increases, you'd almost think that it's increasing. However, those that study this say that an increase is a continued decrease.

2009 is 10% or so less reduced than was 2008. Is that a 10% increase or just a 10% reduced decrease? Experts say this is not thick enough to be an increase. It took 30+ years for the thinness to occur and an increase seems to me, to be an increase.

It sounds like a fantasy football geek saying that his real life team is great because it's the best in one category or another while the win-loss columns show a last place. At some point, the real, unvarnished data is the data. Either they win or they lose.

I worked with an accountant once who always returned to the phrase, "The number is the number". What he meant was that any justification or manipulation of data was only smoke and mirrors. At the end of the day, the numbers are the numbers. Wishing they were something that they are not does not change reality.

Arctic Sea Ice has grown to levels that exceed 2006, 2007 and 2008 for this day each year. A tick or so and 2009 will enter the "Standard Deviation Average" for the 30 year period on which the averages are based.

Watch the speeches in Copenhagen. I'm pretty sure that the over dressed, over bearing, limosine riding, leftist scandinavians in attendance will all hop onto their private jets and fly home after the announcements on this topic.

Blizzards in late Fall, growing Arctic Ice, hunters lost in deep snow in the American west.

Old v. new ice in Arctic, February 2009: These maps show the median age of February sea ice from 1981-2009 (left) and February 2009 (right). As of February 2009, ice older than two years accounted for less than 10 percent of the ice cover. Data provided by J. Maslanik, C. Fowler, University of Colorado, Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research.

Click to expand...

When I re-looked at your picture here, the images were from February of 2009. Do you have a similar image from DECEMBER of 2009?

December of 2009, that is recently, is where the the graph of the Arctic Sea Ice Extent was linked.

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!